@doglatine's banner p

doglatine


				

				

				
17 followers   follows 2 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:08:37 UTC

				

User ID: 619

doglatine


				
				
				

				
17 followers   follows 2 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:08:37 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 619

“Pretty sure they weren’t booing; they were just shouting ‘Go Brandon’.”

immigrants have unprecedent ability to communicate with people back at home

I'd flag that this isn't necessarily at odds with assimilation. Look at first-generation Filipino-Americans as an example - this is a group that has assimilated very well by most standards, but maintains strong connections to their home country. I think we need to be clearer about what assimilation means. To my mind, it's something like convergence of broad values, linguistic competence, and convergence to national medians for things like income, education, and rates of offending. Of course perfect convergence is unlikely due to deep-seated differences between populations, but approximate convergence (or getting better results than the median) is all that's required.

Before I even clicked, I knew this would either be NileRed or Action Lab 🤣

Bing Chat largely doesn't have this problem; the citations it provides are genuine, if somewhat shallow. Likewise, DeepMind's Sparrow is supposedly extremely good at sourcing everything it says. While the jury is still out on the matter to some extent, I am firmly of the opinion that hallucination can be fixed by appropriate use of RLHF/RLAIF and other fine-tuning mechanisms. The core of ChatGPT's problem is that it's a general purpose dialogue agent, optimised nearly as much for storytelling as for truth and accuracy. Once we move to more special-purpose language models appropriately optimised on accuracy in a given field, hallucination will be much less of a big deal.

It definitely doesn't need to be 6 months, especially if you plan in advance and do your homework. My sister-in-law (Filipina) met her fiancé while he was on a 1-month surfing holiday in Siargao, and they connected and bonded and he came out to visit her a couple more times in the next 12 months, and now she's living in the Netherlands with him. She's also (I hasten to add) a very impressive woman in her own right, with graduate degrees from US and European universities, so their case isn't typical, but if anything that supports my case.

cf. Proclus, Ten doubts concerning providence (De decem dubitationibus circa providentiam), 5th century AD:

Such being the problems regarding [ancestral sin], let us first say that every city and every family constitutes one single living being, more so than every single person, being to a larger degree immortal and sacred. Indeed, one single mayor presides over the city as over one single being, one relative over the family as one whole. And there is a single [life] cycle in common for the city and [one] for the family, making the life and the customs of each of them converge, different ones for different cities and families – as their lives are simultaneous as it were – and their different body sizes, different resources, postures and motions – as if one single nature were pervading the whole city and every single family in it, making both that city and that family one.

If, then, also providence is one and fate, with respect to these things, is one, if their life is of the same form and their nature from the same root, how could one refuse to call the city and the family one living being, and from now on to talk specifically about each of them as one, since, when compared to any one of us, [each of them] is a living being that is longer-lived, more divine and more like the universe in that it encompasses the other, smaller living beings and is akin to the everlasting?

So if, as has been shown, every city and every family is a single living being, why wonder if the [deeds] of the forefathers are paid out to the progeny and if the life of the cities, being one, spread out from above [over the citizens] like a canvas, encompasses the compensation, in other times, for actions, be they good or bad, committed in other times? For providence shows not only that every one of us bears the fruit of the things that he did in another time [of his life] and receives the penalty for them, but also that [this is the case for] the city as a unity and the family as a unity – and as a living being, at that – whereby the first to act are not disregarded either (for it is not allowed that something is overlooked, given that providence exists) and the later-born because of the co-affection to the first as to their founding fathers and by the fact that together with them they complete, as it were, one single living being, inherit from them the share that they deserve. For their origin is from them and they share a life and nature in common with them, so that it is obvious that because of them they receive honour and punishment.

The same with any political t-shirts, tbh, or even social media. Being too public with your politics is a sign of poor judgement. An occasional thoughtful Facebook post is fine, but people whose feed is a torrent of political complaints (regardless of orientation) tend to be very difficult people (eg borderline, BPD, narcissists).

I remember that interaction! It's always nice to see a familiar face outside of context, and I had been meaning to reply to you (let no sin of omission go unpunished). To be clear, what you were taking umbrage at was a procedural point - I was upbraiding Glideer on his dropping a quote without context, rather than presupposing that the context was misleading or that no such context could be provided. He (and you) provided that context, and I think it definitely diminishes the moral weight of the passage that another redditor had earlier quoted from. As you probably know, Glideer is the resident Russo-apologist of CredibleDefense, and I like to think I give him a fair shout - I actively upvote him as long as he's saying something informative or sensible, contrary to most of the lurkers on the sub. And I remember the Odessa arson quite well - it was a good example of those awful acts that get swept away by the awfulness of other acts at the time. I certainly didn't intend to be an apologist for thoroughgoing Russophobia.

That said... I'm not too disinclined to own the label of Russophobe. I should tell you about my ten days in St Petersburg, and this seems as good a time as any. In short, to get over a girl (and get over some new ones), back in 2008 I decided to fly to Estonia and get the bus from Tallinn to St P. I had a wonderful 10 days in the city, but it was also an extreme experience. On the one hand, the abundance of architecture and beauty was breathtaking - the Spas na Kravi alone is a marvel. But the Hermitage was my favourite: a wonder, full of wonders (many of them plundered, admittedly). But in my time there I was also (lightly) assaulted a couple of times on the street; apparently the English fop look is an invitation to being shoved, punched in the back, and otherwise disrespected. Many clubs I tried to get into thought I was from the Caucasus, amusingly enough, and I had to feign being Italian to get in (apparently I'm too olive-skinned for the English story to be believable). I had my bag ripped off while I was in the subway (another marvel, although perhaps at that point I would have benefitted from doing less marveling). And best of all, I got arrested! I'd met a friend of one of my Russian expat pals at a punk bar, and one thing had led to another and I was drunkenly heading home with her for a night of cross-cultural communication. We were stopped by police, who found my identity documents insufficient (I had a photocopy of my passport, as per Lonely Planet advice, but this was insufficient). The situation probably wasn't helped by the fact that my new friend was outspoken, and from what I latterly gleaned, had told the police they were acting shamefully. Anyway, I was taken into the station, my possessions were taken from me, and I was put in a cell. My possessions were returned to me a few hours later and I was released, though not without all my English and US currency being swiped from my wallet (with enough of the night remaining for some cross-cultural activities, thankfully).

In any case, it left a significant imprint on me, and when I crossed back over the Estonian border back into Tallinn, I breathed a huge sigh of relief. But it was the little things that most annoyed me. The fact that everyone in St Petersburg seemed to dress the same way - furs for women, leather jackets for men - and the way that nobody smiled. By contrast, Tallinn was a riot of colour and gaiety. The obsession with the latest gadgets and brands, with very little intellectual substance, despite the incredible weight of history on every street corner. The urban decrepitude alongside gaudy conspicuous consumption. All of this was in stark contrast to my experience in Tallinn, and made me incredibly grateful that the rest of Europe was now being spared the turpitude of contemporary mainstream Russian culture.

All that being said, I think the Russian intelligentsiya are some of the best (and smartest) people I've ever met. As much as you might despise the people I mentioned, I should stress that these were children of relatively modest privilege. My closest Russian friend is the child of a physics professor and a geologist, who managed to snag a British guy and get into an Oxbridge PhD on the back of her monstrously high IQ, rather than connections or money. I have zero patience for the corrupt gangsters of Russia's true monetary elite, but my impression is that - for a time - the USSR genuinely cherished and rewarded at least some scientific minds, and my expats contacts are drawn almost entirely from their sons and daughters.

For some reason you can get away with having originally East Asian and SE Asian characters played white actors; you couldn't possibly do it with black characters. This is blatant double-standards, and I feel it especially acutely as the father of two half-pinoy kids.

100% agree on all points. Not clear whether Google will be able to adapt AdWords for LLMs but at least they have a chance if they’re the ones leading the revolution.

And also completely agree about the changing shape of LLMs. They’ll just become a mostly invisible layer in operating systems that eg handles queries and parlays user vague requests (“show me some funny videos”) into specific personalised API calls.

It's funny you mention ChatGPT, as this line of thinking on my part was partly inspired by thinking about whether (and under what circumstances) it might make sense to attribute beliefs to LLMs. I don't think they come close to instantiating the kind of self-regulating representationalk dynamics associated with ideal cases of belief in humans, but they clearly come some of the way there. In that sense, I'm fine with saying that - at an appropriate level of abstraction - ChatGPT has S-dispositions.

A psychological natural kinds framework can certainly accommodate these states being (i) qualitatively different categories, and (ii) two clusters on a spectrum (positions on a spectrum is maybe messier). My own view on this would be that mental attitudes in general (beliefs, desires, hopes, regrets, fears, etc.) can be individuated on a multi-dimensional spectrum as a variety of ways that the mind handles content. While in principle there are all sorts of "in-between states" (cf. Andy Egan on delusions as in-between states), the vast majority of mental contents get handled in a few stereotyped ways, where these ways are themselves underpinned by substantially different neural mechanisms (e.g., for imagining scenarios vs believing scenarios).

FWIW dude I really like your substack and it’s now one of the blogs I’m most happy to see updates for!

That much is implied by the very term 'Russophobia'. Otherwise it would just be called 'having an entirely rational and appropriate attitude to Russia'.

I think /u/Quantumfreakonomics has it right. Despite ostensible public morality being deeply Christianised and emphasising our treatment of others as the polestar of morality, our deeper human concept of virtue is deeply bound up with the concept of personal excellence. A straight man who is failing to be attractive to women is failing in the same way that a slow cheetah or weak oak is failing, namely lacking in the distinctive strengths associated with his nature. Yet because of the deep penetration of Christian and (especially) non-conformist Protestant values into modern Western society — exacerbated by wokeness, a Puritan project in all but name — most people either lack the vocabulary or brazenness to say out loud, “you’re a lousy weak male, and you should be ashamed of yourself.”

Instead, that impulse has to be sublimated into the ethical vocabulary of slave morality, with lack of excellence being converted into lack of morality. The only spaces that call out this male weakness explicitly tend to be those that have explicitly embraced modern master moralities (in however confused a fashion). That’s where you’ll find sexually successful men making fun of incels as weakling feminised soyboy beta cucks etc.. Most other people are thinking that, but lack the self-awareness or honesty to say it.

Good post, and I’m sympathetic with the conclusions. Part of why I think American cultural polarisation is so damaging is that both tribes desperately need each other, all the more so now given that political polarisation is on urban/rural lines rather than northern/southern or other contiguous geographical ones.

Red tribers sometimes like to portray themselves as doing the “real work” of America, while Blue tribers are sometimes wont to portray most of the US outside the major metropolitan areas as sad, economically stagnant, and in decline. Of course the truth is somewhere in the middle, with urban areas concretely dependent on rural areas for things like food and fuel, and rural areas dependent on urban areas for things like finance, communications, and media. I’d like to hope that things like your suggestions — energy strikes, police strikes, transport strikes — could help get convey that fragile interdependence to more Blue Tribe folks.

Also, I do think it’s still vitally important for the Red Tribe to maintain at least some representation in elite spaces like academia and highbrow media. Every mass movement needs its intellectuals, wonks, and diplomats, and you don’t get to ignore the realities of cognitive elite power simply by calling yourself an anti-elitist movement. Moreover, it seems to me — as an academic who’s flitted between a variety of institutions — that there’s a vast difference between 5% conservative and 10% conservative institutions. In the latter, a small set of people are comfortable being openly conservative, and can voice conservative talking points at meetings and lectures (even if they don’t get invited to as many cool parties). By contrast, in 5% institutions, conservatives basically live underground; they don’t have the critical mass to be accepted as a legitimate dissident community. So I think keeping that narrow corridor of elite conservatism open is critical for mutual understanding and acceptance.

It's a god damned nightmare for those parents. They begin developing these ironclad notions that something is "wrong" with their child because they have so much trouble relating to their nature. It's nonstop conflict and friction between parent and parent and child.

I'm a bit puzzled by your comment. I'm in an international and interracial marriage (my wife is Filipino) and have two mixed-race children, and I genuinely have no clue what you mean about "relating to their nature". Maybe an example would help?

There are obviously some cultural differences between my wife and these sometimes create interesting points of disagreement, but they're utterly dwarfed by the massive similarities in our values and life goals; I have far more of substance in common with her than any other woman I've met (e.g., we are both highly educated, nerdy, extremely open to new experiences, liberal with some a smattering of conservative/reactionary attitudes, education-focused, extremely practical in matters of love and romance, etc....).

A quick post for the new subreddit. Are we headed for a new era of polygyny? Looking at contemporary metropolitan dating markets, both anecdote and data arguably suggests that what I’d call casual open polygyny is becoming a lot more common. By this I mean sexual dynamics in which men and women enjoy casual open sexual relationships, but where the male parties in such relationships have more simultaneous female partners than the female parties have male partners. I think the data supports this kind of polygyny specifically rather than general polyamory as the dominant new model, insofar as it seems that a large subset of young men have few or zero sexual partners and a small subset of men have large numbers of sexual partners, with the SD in number of sexual partners being much higher for men than women. (But of course there are plenty of women who have multiple partners too.)

If I had to guess, I’d say this trend is being facilitated by things like hookup apps, societal atomisation, better contraception, and the decline of religion. But we also perhaps shouldn’t be too surprised — monogamy and polygyny are the two most common stable mating norms both cross culturally and historically (polyandry is exceptionally rare; general polygamy fairly rare).

Still, this trend obviously creates a problem in the longer run, because our society is still largely built around social monogamy: Men and women who form long term partnerships overwhelmingly do so on a one-to-one basis. As sexually actively young people transition from polygyny to monogamy in their late 20s, this leaves a lot of jilted women and bitter romantically inexperienced men, hardly a recipe for a happy long term marriage.

In the long run there will probably be some kind of correction, possibly via polygynous marriages becoming more commonplace.

There will also need to be a correction in terms of norms and expectations. Looking to the future, a significant proportion of young men may simply fail to find a romantic life partner unless they can distinguish themselves in some way. This is already how it works in many stable polygynous societies, but a lot of the resentment of Incels comes about because we’re at a liminal period, where monogamous norms dominate public discourse but de facto open casual polygyny is an increasingly common in the sex lives of young people.

Anyways, shoutouts to this whole debacle for rekindling my fear of women, and quenching my fear of missing out.

This kind of stuff is only really a major problem with a very specific western, educated, secular, metropolitan, young, trendy demographic. Unfortunately, most people here fall into many of those same baskets. However, there’s no reason not to branch out. I’ve been urging people here for years to broaden their dating horizons. Dating across class and education boundaries never worked for me, but I’ve had great romantic relationships with women from Russia, Japan, and Pakistan, and my wife is Filipina.

Unclear. Tactical nuclear weapons aren't necessarily all that useful on the battlefield. People think of nukes as "destroy everything bombs", but if we're talking about an armoured division spread out across a few square miles, then a small nuke is hardly a game changer (and ironically, a lot of the ex-Soviet hardware Ukraine is packing is precisely designed to allow crew survivability in the wake of a nuclear strike). A nuclear missile on Kiev, Lviv, or Odessa might be effective, but would instantly mark Russia as a pariah state - the breaking of the nuclear taboo (and the consequent breakdown of non-proliferation) is in no way in the interests of their few remaining global friends like China or India.

The least bad nuclear escalation from Moscow, I think, would be a nuclear test (following appropriate legal measures to excuse Russia from its test-ban commitments). This would incur relatively few diplomatic costs, and would immediately raise the stakes for all concerned. That said, it wouldn't change the situation on the battlefield at all. At best, it might prompt a fresh round of negotiations with Erdogan et al. as intermediaries.

There are lots of other large scale processes that have very high cleanliness standards and can’t use strong disinfectants, from brewing to mycoprotein cultivation. Honestly seems like one of the less difficult things to get right.

As much as I’m loving the current Twitter drama, it’s hard for me to see Musk’s gameplan here, assuming there is one. Firing half of the workforce (including an unspecified number of engineers) in a seemingly cruel and abrupt fashion, for example, looks a lot like an unforced error. The remaining staff will doubtless be concerned about the security of their jobs and updating their LinkedIn as we speak, morale will be generally low, the PR will be terrible, and there are some indications that he’ll face lawsuits for failing to abide by Californian employment law. Even if Musk wanted to clear out dead wood, wouldn’t it have been better to do it via a bunch of more carefully targeted stealth-firings and budget cuts playing out over a few months at least?

Compound this with the advertisers fleeing Twitter and a bunch of unnecessary antagonistic shitposting, and I’m torn between (i) Elon is undergoing a manic episode and is acting in a disordered and auboptimal fashion, or (ii) his actual intent is to turn Twitter into a dumpster fire and ultimately close the whole site.

I’m aware that (ii) is dangerously close to 4D-chess nonsense, but I don’t totally discount it. It is possible that Musk thinks Twitter is unsalvageable and it’s better to run the ship into the ground with plausible deniability than try to reform it.

But that would involve taking a massive hit to his reputation as a businessman, and there’s no guarantee that whatever replaces it will be any better, which leads me to think (ii) isn’t very likely (also Musk seems to genuinely like Twitter as a forum, which I don’t really understand).

Is there a (iii), where Musk isn’t making any unforced errors, and the mass abrupt firing of staff is necessary? If anyone can help me see it, let me know.

That’s not an especially hard one for the ancap to resolve; you can just let private medical licensing authorities award medical-qualification ratings based on their preferred criteria and create an accreditation marketplace. If I choose to go to an amateur surgeon despite him having low ratings, that’s up to me.

Unrecoverable just in the sense that this will forever be a part of the narrative around EA, and will be brought up as an easy gotcha by people looking to take potshots. I think the movement will survive, for sure, but it’s a chastening experience. It also wouldn’t surprise me if at least some significant faction of EA attempt to rebrand their branch of the movement in response (even if the underlying ideology doesn’t change). “Oh, we’re Compassionate Altruists not Effective Altruists. We still believe in optimising philanthropy to reduce suffering, but we learned a lot of lessons from the FTX fiasco and have come a long way since then.”

In fact the issue is a blatantly obvious mismatch of supply and demand.

I think this is highly dependent on age. Even before online dating, the conventional wisdom was that women had a massive edge between the ages of 18-30 but the power dynamic began shifting to men after that. It’s certainly matched what I’ve seen getting older. Right now all my close male friends are in their 30s, and every single one of them is married with kids. By contrast I have quite a few (mostly unhappily) single female friends in the same age range.